In the 21st century, Canadian identity is made up of various historical symbols that have been removed from their historical contingencies and placed in the center of Canadian identity. In other words, I don’t think it matters much what the symbols symbolize, per se, except for the fact that they symbolize something intrinsically Canadian. This identity is being sold in the “I Am Canadian” Molson Beer Ad and the Canadian, Please” video through a combination of nationalism and the rejecting of other nations, especially the US. I think that by juxtaposing the US and Canada, especially in the ideological fight over North America (in which Mexico never takes a part), the videos seek to say that Canadian identity is unique from, and moreover superior to, the identity of any other nation. What’s being sold is a vapid Canadian identity, based on empty reinvention of historical symbols (save for the idea of pro-being a Canadian, whatever that means, which exists in all the symbols), and who’s buying is every Canadian who does not take a critical eye to their own history (so, the vast majority of people). But maybe that isn’t so negative as I said it, maybe forgetting parts of history for the sake of community and nationalism is a good thing. I don’t think so, but it was a thought I had and I’m not sure why I disagree with it.
There are several interesting things in your response to the videos here. First, I’m intrigued about the ideological fight over North America (and the fact that Mexico doesn’t seem to take part in it)–what do you see the US & Canada fighting ABOUT in North America? Do you see Canadian identity propaganda as an attempt to prove superiority over ALL other nations–or just our neighbour to the south? As well, your comment about forgetting parts of history to foster community/nationalism not necessarily being a healthy activity to engage in as a country is insightful, and we’ll explore some of the versions of the stories we tell to each other and ourselves as “Canadians” this term. To help you begin thinking about why you disagree with acts of forgetting, what is it that feels wrong about it? What are some examples of these “forgettings”, and why do you think they are important to Canadian history?
Don’t worry about answering all of those questions on here–they’re just some things to keep in mind! Good work!
My initial reaction after watching the two shorts was to say the Canadian identity is something that is usually being made fun of. It seems that no one has been able to really define what it means to be Canadian. Universally, we appear to have gotten a reputation for being associated with being lumberjacks, living in igloos, playing hockey, beavers and moose, and constantly saying “eh” and “sorry,” which all contribute to this Canadian identity. Some of these symbols, such as beavers, have been taken out of their historical contingencies and are now used to represent us as a country. Although, like these clips, the Olympic ceremony that featured big, blow up flying beavers and lumberjacks show that while we may not have something big, like the fiscal power of the USA, or the monarchy of Britain, that clearly defines the Canadian identity, it is something that many people want. We pride ourselves for having medical coverage, being polite, living in a beautiful and vast country, and accepting diversity; perhaps the most pushed selling point of the Canadian identity, is that we are our own entity, and definitely not American. Whatever the Canadian identity is, all we really know is that it’s not anything like the American identity. In addition, not only are we unique from other countries, but we like to make it sound superior, showing our nationalism. It seems that even though we try to sell this idea to the world, and some people do buy into it, I feel it is largely Canadians that buy this image. We rally around the idea that we are not Americans, even if we don’t know how to really define our own identity.
You’ve touched on something really important, albeit slippery, about popular perceptions of 21st century Canadian identity here: the fact that we are not American. Do you think that Canada & Canadians NEED to be defined as/by something we’re NOT–or do you think we could stand alone? In other words, what/who do you think Canada/Canadians would be if we didn’t have the USA to compare and contrast ourselves with?!
(For the record, I also thought those blow-up, flying beavers were kind of ridiculous!)
I believe that what is being sold here is the creation of some sort of Canadian identity and sense of patriotism that most Canadians generally do not feel. There are many reasons as to why most Canadian’s are seen as lacking a patriotic spirit, but our vast geographical spread harbouring numerous cultural identities provides the best explanation. Since it is tremendously difficult for someone in British Columbia to feel a patriotic connection to someone living in Newfoundland I think these two videos grasp the few shared aspects of culture that Canadians from all regions hold in regard. There is an attempt to overlook the differences that make Canada unique as a nation made up of many nations, and instead, create a sense of patriotism and identity through shared Canadian icons like health care, beavers, peacekeeping, and of course, hockey. These aspects of Canadian life seem to do a fantastic job of drawing Canadians together; one only needs remember the Vancouver 2010 Olympics, and the sense of patriotic national pride felt by many Canadians, especially after winning gold in men’s and women’s hockey.
Both videos obviously pit Canada against other nations, most importantly the USA, in attempts to create an identity strictly by not being someone else. This, along with the few cultural aspects that Canadian’s share, seems to be the defining criteria of 21st century Canadian identity. The purpose of these videos differs for each. The song “Canadian, Please”, was probably in response to the Olympics that occurred the same year in which the song was released. Although using the same tactics in the Molson Ad, Joe the Canadian had a much different objective. With competition against massive American beer corporations like Budweiser, Coors, etc, Molson used this ad to create a Canadian identity and hopefully make Canadians want to buy Canadian beer.
In reality, it is difficult to feel the same sense of patriotism as someone who lives 7000km away, but these videos attempt to create a sense of Canadian identity, and ultimately help define 21st century Canadian identity, by highlighting a few common aspects of life that all Canadians share; whether it be hockey, beavers, healthcare, or just the fact that we are not American.
Tyler, you did a great job of pointing to the potential motivations behind the creation of these two videos–especially the profit agenda lurking in the background of the Molson (” Buy Canadian”) ad. It’s also interesting how you referred to the American beer companies as “massive”, as if Molson was a small-town brewing company dwarfed by comparison to its US competitors!
Your mention of the difficulty of a British Columbian & Newfoundlander feeling connected to each other as Canadians also raises the great questions about geographical and cultural nuances affecting Canadian identity across the provinces and territories: do you think that responses to hockey, beavers, healthcare, non-American status are, in fact, common across the country? I wonder how a citizen in the NWT or Francophone in Quebec might respond to these videos, to take two examples…
After watching the 2 short youtube films, “I am Canadian” and “Canadian Please” it is obvious that the majority of Canadian population understands and represents truly what a Canadian stands for in his or her lifetime. For example, Canada’s identity has always been being the peacekeepers around the world and not wanting to get involved in wars. They love to play hockey and say “eh”. I believe the “I am Canadian” ad is very correct by Molson, and that is how many people see Canadians outside of Canada. Canada may not know it, but it is in fact being sold TO them. In order to build nationalism for the country we use these tactics of always being “polite” and images of beavers and lumberjacks to stay molded together. Canada is a great country to live in with health benefits and a great landscape. These films outlined how proud we should be to be Canadian and to live in such a wonderful country. The Canadians are buying this information as it is always revolving around us. For example, when Canadians travel ( or even Americans) they will put the Canadian Flag ( with a maple leaf; another symbol) on their backpacks in order to display their “background” creating a good image for them. 21st century identity is outlined by the videos representing what Canadians are and what we stand for.
Kyle, thank you for your response highlighting some of the more “lovable” aspects of Canadian identity, as well as for suggesting that such pleasant images are also being “sold” to Canadian citizens who may not be too concerned with what it means to live in Canada. To continue thinking critically about Canadian identity, try to think of some examples that might undermine sweeping statements about who Canadians are. For example, do ALL communities across Canada enjoy playing (or even watching!) hockey? What about our reputation as peacekeepers–what kinds of roles did Canada play in WWII? Korea? Afghanistan?
These videos tell us a lot about our Canadian identity. More importantly, each video relies heavily on stereotypical ideas to describe our country as a whole. Each of the videos uses these stereotypes in a different way. For example, the beer ad “I Am Canadian,” uses a satirical approach. In doing so, the ad points fun at the fact that people outside of Canada stereotype us Canadians, as lumberjacks and fur traders who live in igloos. The advertisement then labels Canadians with more stereotypes, while bringing in patriotic music. Because of the way in which this advertisement goes about selling their product, I believe that the beer is being sold to young, Canadian men. On the other hand, the next video uses a song as a way to shine light on Canadianism. Also pointing out stereotypes, this song is directed to both children and adults. Using the song and costume helps to engage those of younger ages; meanwhile, the lyrics have more meaning to older groups. After watching both of these videos, I think that each is tells us that Canadian identity of the twenty-first century is highly labeled and that our history has more to it than just beavers, RCMP’s and Hockey. While the video is able to attract those whom they intend to, using these Canadian, satirical stereotypes, they do not tell us any more than what most of us already know. In hindsight, the videos tell us that Canadian identity of this day and age needs to be further distinguished apart from universal stereotypes.
Nice work shedding light on the irony of the Molson ad replacing stereotypes of Canadians with… more stereotypes! I’m curious what exactly it is about the video that prompts you to speculate that the beer is being sold to young men, though. Do you think the things that Joe Canadian is referring to are somehow more “masculine” than “feminine”? By extension, is the Canadian identity that Joe/Molson promote embodied only by guys who look like Joe?!
These shorts portray a view of Canada that is stereotypical and defensive. Particularly in “Canadian Please,” the chorus defends Canadian icons in reference to other countries’ icons in order to protect our image as a country that is proud of our accomplishments. It enforces Canadian stereotypes in order to give us a distinct identity that has been carried and developed throughout the centuries. In the Molson Canadian commercial there is more a portrayal of what modern Canadians truly are, and particularly why we should be seen at least as important as our southerly neighbour. These shorts try to prove that Canada is more than just that “push-over” country living in the shadow and fear of the U.S. Canada in the 21st century has moved on from the past, such the fear of manifest destiny that was a driving factor in confederation. Instead it focuses on our achievements and accomplishments and our overall development into a united and strong country. Together these shorts are selling an image of being Canadian, not as that country who has icons like any other country, but as a country filled with people who embrace and are even proud of these stereotypes no matter how ridiculous they may seem sometimes. Whose buying this image? The world. These shorts are aimed at all those who aren’t Canadian and have yet to know why our stereotypes are different than everyone else’s stereotypes. We want the world to buy the belief that we stand together in unity as a country that is distinct as well as diverse and proud to be Canadian!
Hi there! You’re heading toward an interesting analysis of these shorts when you suggest that they are aimed at “all those who aren’t Canadian and have yet to know why our stereotypes are different” from others’. Can you speak a little bit about HOW and WHY you think that Canadian stereotypes are different? Or why you think it’s important that “the world” “buy” the idea that Canadians stand together in unity? Your language there ( about “buying” who Canadians are) is fascinating, as it sounds like national identity is something to be consumed–like a nice, cold beer for example!
These two videos repeat the same stereotypes that have been and are broadcast about Canadians and Canada. Like stereotypes about every countries, although they are partly based on truth, they are now outdated or largely exaggerated. However, it is the case for most (every?) nations, and I would argue that it helps defining a nation’s culture.
The two videos appear similar but the process with which they assert Canadian identity is different. In “I am Canadian,” the process is fairly common, as it consists in a list of usual Canadian stereotypes and a strong insistence on Canada being different from the United States.
I feel that “Canadian, Please” tries to assert Canadian identity in a more unusual way and without using common stereotypes. Instead, they appeal to facts that truly defines Canada, and make comparisons to other cultures to assert that Canada is just as much a country with its own culture as any other.
I have read on this forum that Canadians did not feel patriotic in general. My experience here as an exchange student proved me the exact contrary. From what I have heard so far, Canadians generally see their country in a very good light, are very proud of it and regularly re-assert some features of their being Canadian through stereotypes.
I think those videos are meant both to Canadians to feel a certain feeling of unity and, most of all, pride, as well as for the rest of the world, to recognize Canada as having its very own culture, if not a superior one.
Vinciane, thank you for drawing our attention to the fact that most, if not all, countries have similar “lists” of stereotypes about their citizenry, and that they CAN be useful in thinking about a nation–even if the stereotypes aren’t “true”! Thank you also for sharing your view on Canadian patriotism as an exchange student. Perhaps you are more attuned to it as a visitor to Canada? The Canadians you meet might want to help give you a great impression of their country and themselves; whereas when Canadians interact with other Canadians (who might just accept that Canada is great, etc.) they don’t feel the need to openly state how proud they are of Canada?
Have you had similar experiences travelling to other countries? Has anyone else on this forum found that they become increasingly patriotic of their own country when travelling to other ones or interacting with visitors?
Stereotypes about the Canadian identity are presented in the videos, but stereotypes are present and common for any country. In the “Canadian, Please” video they mention some of those stereotypes from other countries, for instance ‘lose the gun,’ which is obviously referring to the gun happy Americans. But these stereotypes do not accurately reflect the identity of a citizen living in any country. My argument is that these videos have very little, if anything to do with a real Canadian’s identity. Instead of relating to the actual icon itself, we relate to the stereotype. Stereotypes such as Canadians exist in a perpetual winter and drink maple syrup, when in reality few of us have had these experiences, or the experiences may be highly localized in one region of Canada. These stereotypes are repeated and circulated to a point where they become a truth.
These ‘truths’ are further confirmed by the media. They sell us the Canadian experience with their Canadian products, and we buy both the product and the idea of Canadian identity. The advertisement where the beaver jumps on the obnoxious American makes us feel united against the others, who are mean and not as smart. What these videos tell us about the Canadian identity in the 21st century is that we are united and are proud of our country, and we identify each other though our own distinct icons. But those icons we recognize as part of our identity are sold to us through the media, and probably based on jokes that were made by Russell Peters.
Great response to the videos! I like how you worked to break down national stereotypes (i.e. living in perpetual winter) into more localized/regional experiences, referred to the powers of repetition and dissemination in creating “truths”, paid homage to the media’s work in selling iconography, AND worked in Russell Peters.
The “Canadian, Please” and “I am Canadian” videos both address the Canadian identity through using stereotypes that people outside of Canada have. In the “I am Canadian” video, Jo says, “he is not a lumberjack, does live in a igloo, has a prime minister not a president, that a tunic is a hat, and that it is pronounced zed not zee”. This video continues on to mention how Canada is the best part of North America. As a whole the video gives its audience the sense that even though all of these stereotypes do exist, these are the things that make Canada, Canada and that we should be proud of these things that make us different. In the “Canadian, Please” is presenting the same Canadian identity has the “I am Canadian” video. It points the stereotypes of the RCMP, we are all polite, that no one owns guns, and multiculturalism. That is being sold in these videos is the idea of Canadian nationalism and all of the things bringing Canada together as a nation.
Jennifer, good work summarizing aspects of each video here. I’m wondering if you agree with one or both of them, and the pictures they paint about what Canada is and who Canadians are… Do you “buy” the idea that ALL Canadians are polite? Don’t own guns? Uphold multiculturalism? Love playing/watching hockey? If you had to imagine what a “typical” Canadian looked like, would it be “Joe Canadian” from the Molson ad? Who is being left out if so?
The two videos, “Canadian, Please” and “I am Canadian” play on the well known stereotypes of the Canadian culture to bring about a sense of patriotism, and to separate Canada as it’s own entity in North America, especially from the United States of America. However, I’m not sure I agree on the way the producers of both videos went about in comparing Canada to other countries (although I am fully aware that satire is 100% involved). Not only do we automatically assume everyone wants to be a Canadian, we also reinforce the exact stereotypes that drive most Canadian nuts (e.g. living in igloos, we all own canoes, etc). As mentioned by chilane above, we are all fully aware that as Canadians, most of these things do not occur on the regular, and are reinforced by the media time and time again to the point of “truth.”
As for our Canadian identity in the 21st century, it seems as if in these two videos, we are presenting ourselves as a united front, with our own symbols, stereotypes and features unique to Canada. A feat which is sometimes forgotten about in Canadian culture; although we are all proud to be Canadians, we don’t always display our patriotism outwardly. However, it is interesting that many of these symbols that we claim to be “Canadian,” we don’t articulate HOW they really are national symbols. For example, maple syrup; A lot of people (even Canadians) believe it is a symbol because we put it on everything, and don’t make a connection between the symbol and events within our own country, such as the fact that Canadians were the first to tap the syrup. The same can be said for the beaver – it isn’t just on the nickel, it is a symbol of the past fur trade that our country was built on. It seems as if we may be losing touch with the real reasons behind our national symbols, even though we use them in national and international ad campaigns. We are selling our sense of nationalism and togetherness to our own Canadian audience, and to the larger international audience as well, and it seems we are all buying into it.
Marissa, you’ve done a great job building on chilane’s (I’m not sure if this is their real name and not just a username–apologies if it isn’t!) post about the sweeping assumptions that go into creating and upholding national stereotypes. Your comments about HOW symbols become “national” are especially intriguing, and suggest a deeper role for Canadian history in contemporary culture. Good work!
The two shorts “Canadian, Please” and “I am Canadian” are emphasizing a definition of what it means to be Canadian based on somewhat superficial ideas; however, I don’t think this is a bad thing at all. Although a nation’s history should be respected and valued as what has shaped that nation into what it is today, what truly defines a country lies in the here-and-now. For example, a common stereotype about Canadians is that we own pet beavers. This has little (or nothing) to do with the history of Canada. Rather, it is more of a modern-day joke that has caught on and become funny. Similar examples are the ideas that Canadians live in igloos, work as lumberjacks, and eat maple syrup on everything. These stereotypes, while silly and largely untrue, can actually be taken to suggest that Canadians take extreme pride in the characteristics of our country – the native animals, the weather, and the resources, etc. “I am Canadian” and “Canadian, Please” both play on these kinds of ideas in a lighthearted way, which also suggests that Canadians are proud to be who we are no matter what anyone thinks of us. Furthermore, the direct comparisons to other countries shows that we consider ourselves to be the best! Both shorts sell a strong sense of national pride that any Canadian can fit into, regardless of how much they know about Canadian history. By focussing on modern ideas, the shorts are easily accessible to young people.
Amanda, this is a nice lighthearted defense of the surface symbols presented in these videos! I’m intrigued by your claim that “what truly defines a country lies in the here-and-now”. All of the examples you give–pet beavers, igloos, lumberjacks, maple syrup–have very real historical roots SOMEWHERE, even though they’ve been significantly distorted and satirized over time! I also want to gently push you to think about one of your final statements: CAN “any Canadian fit into” these stereotypes? Or do the videos assume a particular audience…?
From watching both videos, it is obvious that Canadians pride themselves on being just that: Canadian. The level of patriotism and esteem oozing from both videos is sky-high, but it must be taken into consideration that much of this self-worth is drawn from stereotypical Canadian symbols that are widely recognized and identified by Canadians and the world alike in the 21st century. Tokens that pay homage to this “Canadian Identity” include many clichéd images, such as the beaver, mounties, hockey, and the renowned maple leaf. What’s being sold here is not merely just beer, nor is it simply a boastful display, but rather an insipid Canadian identity that rests upon broad stereotypes and an innate desire to be seen as a separate superior entity to that of the Americans. Being a Canadian, I understand that creating a separate and unique identity for Canada is key, as we are consistently looped in with the United States and considered to be a carbon-copy of American culture. In saying this though, I must contend that building an identity upon modern clichéd images and symbols that inspire nothing more than a short burst of Canadian pride impedes upon any chance we have to establish a true and distinctive Canadian identity, which should rightfully be build upon historical and cultural foundations. Rather than being known as über polite, maple syrup loving, moose riding hockey fanatics, we should establish ourselves as a vast coherent nation of cultural, historical, and environmental wealth. If we look to our North American counterparts to the South, we often associate them with “manifest destiny” and being a “military giant”. When the spotlight is on Canada, we are often associated with trivial symbols, which barely encompass a fraction of what Canada is all about. All in all, although both videos are amusing and somewhat uplifting, they lack, for me, the ongoing spirit and lustre that should accompany a tribute to Canada and Canadian identity as a whole.
Aviaah, this is an interesting take on the two videos–your response is clearly very passionate! While this post contains many examples of what you see as superficial images/symbols/stereotypes of Canadians, I’m wondering what icons or symbols you might choose to better represent Canada as a ” vast coherent nation of cultural, historical, and environmental wealth”? What do those words mean to you? What do you think Canada is “all about”?
The two videos speak highly of the pride of being a Canadian. In the twenty first century, these videos collectively demonstrate the different aspects of being Canadian. In the video done by two students dressed as RCMP officers we see the symbolism of justice and integrity present in the uniform. In other video of the Molson commercial, we see that the Canadian is polite enough to endure the mocking stereotypical insults from his fellow coworker, but when it becomes too much, he resorts to aggressive behaviour. I would actually say that this scene, though amusing, does not collectively represent the identity of Canadians. We Canadians are known to be polite and perhaps even to take a stand on issues that matter to us, but it does not mean we are violent in any way when provoked — though that’s what the commercial seems to imply. These two videos demonstrate that we have a rich history and have quite a bit of attributes associated with being Canadian, and collectively, they both depict the Canadian identity as that of one being filled with pride and happiness.
In terms of who these videos are targeted at and who is buying or selling the message or product in them, there is a very large difference. In the “Canadian, Please” video, it is targeted to non-citizens of Canada and telling them that we know they want to be Canadian because we and Canada itself is so amazing. The Molson commercial seems to be targeted at Canadians. I attest to this because at the very end of the commercial the announcer boldy claims he is Canadian, once again demonstrating our pride in Canada and in ourselves having the identity of being Canadian.
Amrita, you make some good points about the possible readings of these videos in your post. I’m really interested in your interpretation of Joe’s speech in the Molson ad–how he is polite until he is pushed to his edge (and gives his “aggressive” talk)–but that you don’t see his outburst and potential violence as representative of Canadians. To play Devil’s Advocate here, “mild-mannered” Canadians are also known to riot over hockey scores, take part in demonstrations/protests that can become violent, and historically played offensive roles in two world wars–not to mention other military conflicts!
Being an immigrant to canada, I still have not fully figure out canadian identity. Despite the Advertisements and Patriotic Videos i have seen over 12 years in canada, all I really figured out is that, we are stereotypical and culturally “neutral”. Our Multiculturalism aspect of society breaks down any collective Identity as a nation. I would say, despite everything mentioned in the first video, is that, we as canadians, are a group that can live with each other. World views gave us “what is means to be canadian” such as Hockey, Maple Syrup, Beaver, Saying “Sorry”, but they are not what really define canada. The first Video is more to give canadians pride through what is “awesome” about being canadian while the second video is to show people whom are not from canada what it is to be like.
canadian pride is not like what is seen in other countries, we do not hold any social or political beliefs as a collective nation, but our understanding of each other can be used to describe canadian identity
Harry: I was born and raised in Canada–and I still haven’t fully figured out Canadian identity either! Your idea of Canada being culturally “neutral” is very interesting; that multiculturalism “breaks down any collective identity as a nation” is also intriguing. I think you could find a number of examples of groups within Canada who would fit your model: Franco-Canadiens, Indigenous groups, etc. Do you think it’s possible that this multiplicity of identities comes together to make up an overarching Canadian identity?
The two videos utilise comedy to connect with the Canadian viewer and play on the stereotypes and the reality of what a Canadian really is. The “I am Canadian” advertisement links the good things about being a Canadian specifically with the Molson brand of beer, as if suggesting to the audience that you could not be one without the other. I get the feeling that this advert is directed at an older demographic than the “Canadian, Please” video. It’s use of largely more mature life events that makes one a Canadian would stir familiarity in an slightly older demographic. The “I am Canadian” campaign bases each archetypal action or event on what the company believes is important to the 21st Century Canadian viewer; family, friends, hockey and morals. Whilst the “Canadian, Please” advert relies on a literal song and dance being popular and catchy rather than connecting with the viewer or even providing any information about the beer itself. The campaign aims to make an attachment to the beer through the videos popularity and therefore similarly aims to inform their decision when next buying beer. The “Canadian, Please” advert is aimed at people who are already Canadians so it is clear that the advert is trying to say that everyone else wants to be Canadian, trying to bolster national pride the company seeks to tie Canadianism with its brand of beer, affirming just like the “I am Canadian” advertisement that to be Canadian you have to drink Canadian beer.
Hi there! Nice attention to the demographics of each videos’ intended audience. Your breakdown of the Molson ad into four 21st century “Canadian” values is insightful, as is your connection of “true” Canadian identity with the purchase and consumption of Canadian beer. Also: the short music video isn’t trying to sell us any brand of beer–just an identity!
Hi there L1A!
Thanks to all those of you who have already responded to the videos–you’ve made some wonderful insights. We’re still waiting to hear from a few more of you & will still accept submissions for this assignment due to the potential mix-up of switching tutorials and blog walls for some of you. Looking forward to meeting you all in person this week!
-Kaitlin
Kaitlin, 
ecopeland, 
oftheawkwards, and 13 others are discussing.
liorbarel 12:17 am on January 7, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In the 21st century, Canadian identity is made up of various historical symbols that have been removed from their historical contingencies and placed in the center of Canadian identity. In other words, I don’t think it matters much what the symbols symbolize, per se, except for the fact that they symbolize something intrinsically Canadian. This identity is being sold in the “I Am Canadian” Molson Beer Ad and the Canadian, Please” video through a combination of nationalism and the rejecting of other nations, especially the US. I think that by juxtaposing the US and Canada, especially in the ideological fight over North America (in which Mexico never takes a part), the videos seek to say that Canadian identity is unique from, and moreover superior to, the identity of any other nation. What’s being sold is a vapid Canadian identity, based on empty reinvention of historical symbols (save for the idea of pro-being a Canadian, whatever that means, which exists in all the symbols), and who’s buying is every Canadian who does not take a critical eye to their own history (so, the vast majority of people). But maybe that isn’t so negative as I said it, maybe forgetting parts of history for the sake of community and nationalism is a good thing. I don’t think so, but it was a thought I had and I’m not sure why I disagree with it.
Kaitlin 5:38 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
There are several interesting things in your response to the videos here. First, I’m intrigued about the ideological fight over North America (and the fact that Mexico doesn’t seem to take part in it)–what do you see the US & Canada fighting ABOUT in North America? Do you see Canadian identity propaganda as an attempt to prove superiority over ALL other nations–or just our neighbour to the south? As well, your comment about forgetting parts of history to foster community/nationalism not necessarily being a healthy activity to engage in as a country is insightful, and we’ll explore some of the versions of the stories we tell to each other and ourselves as “Canadians” this term. To help you begin thinking about why you disagree with acts of forgetting, what is it that feels wrong about it? What are some examples of these “forgettings”, and why do you think they are important to Canadian history?
Don’t worry about answering all of those questions on here–they’re just some things to keep in mind! Good work!
tazizi 2:50 pm on January 7, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
My initial reaction after watching the two shorts was to say the Canadian identity is something that is usually being made fun of. It seems that no one has been able to really define what it means to be Canadian. Universally, we appear to have gotten a reputation for being associated with being lumberjacks, living in igloos, playing hockey, beavers and moose, and constantly saying “eh” and “sorry,” which all contribute to this Canadian identity. Some of these symbols, such as beavers, have been taken out of their historical contingencies and are now used to represent us as a country. Although, like these clips, the Olympic ceremony that featured big, blow up flying beavers and lumberjacks show that while we may not have something big, like the fiscal power of the USA, or the monarchy of Britain, that clearly defines the Canadian identity, it is something that many people want. We pride ourselves for having medical coverage, being polite, living in a beautiful and vast country, and accepting diversity; perhaps the most pushed selling point of the Canadian identity, is that we are our own entity, and definitely not American. Whatever the Canadian identity is, all we really know is that it’s not anything like the American identity. In addition, not only are we unique from other countries, but we like to make it sound superior, showing our nationalism. It seems that even though we try to sell this idea to the world, and some people do buy into it, I feel it is largely Canadians that buy this image. We rally around the idea that we are not Americans, even if we don’t know how to really define our own identity.
Kaitlin 5:43 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
You’ve touched on something really important, albeit slippery, about popular perceptions of 21st century Canadian identity here: the fact that we are not American. Do you think that Canada & Canadians NEED to be defined as/by something we’re NOT–or do you think we could stand alone? In other words, what/who do you think Canada/Canadians would be if we didn’t have the USA to compare and contrast ourselves with?!
(For the record, I also thought those blow-up, flying beavers were kind of ridiculous!)
tyler5 3:07 pm on January 7, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I believe that what is being sold here is the creation of some sort of Canadian identity and sense of patriotism that most Canadians generally do not feel. There are many reasons as to why most Canadian’s are seen as lacking a patriotic spirit, but our vast geographical spread harbouring numerous cultural identities provides the best explanation. Since it is tremendously difficult for someone in British Columbia to feel a patriotic connection to someone living in Newfoundland I think these two videos grasp the few shared aspects of culture that Canadians from all regions hold in regard. There is an attempt to overlook the differences that make Canada unique as a nation made up of many nations, and instead, create a sense of patriotism and identity through shared Canadian icons like health care, beavers, peacekeeping, and of course, hockey. These aspects of Canadian life seem to do a fantastic job of drawing Canadians together; one only needs remember the Vancouver 2010 Olympics, and the sense of patriotic national pride felt by many Canadians, especially after winning gold in men’s and women’s hockey.
Both videos obviously pit Canada against other nations, most importantly the USA, in attempts to create an identity strictly by not being someone else. This, along with the few cultural aspects that Canadian’s share, seems to be the defining criteria of 21st century Canadian identity. The purpose of these videos differs for each. The song “Canadian, Please”, was probably in response to the Olympics that occurred the same year in which the song was released. Although using the same tactics in the Molson Ad, Joe the Canadian had a much different objective. With competition against massive American beer corporations like Budweiser, Coors, etc, Molson used this ad to create a Canadian identity and hopefully make Canadians want to buy Canadian beer.
In reality, it is difficult to feel the same sense of patriotism as someone who lives 7000km away, but these videos attempt to create a sense of Canadian identity, and ultimately help define 21st century Canadian identity, by highlighting a few common aspects of life that all Canadians share; whether it be hockey, beavers, healthcare, or just the fact that we are not American.
Kaitlin 5:56 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Tyler, you did a great job of pointing to the potential motivations behind the creation of these two videos–especially the profit agenda lurking in the background of the Molson (” Buy Canadian”) ad. It’s also interesting how you referred to the American beer companies as “massive”, as if Molson was a small-town brewing company dwarfed by comparison to its US competitors!
Your mention of the difficulty of a British Columbian & Newfoundlander feeling connected to each other as Canadians also raises the great questions about geographical and cultural nuances affecting Canadian identity across the provinces and territories: do you think that responses to hockey, beavers, healthcare, non-American status are, in fact, common across the country? I wonder how a citizen in the NWT or Francophone in Quebec might respond to these videos, to take two examples…
madden34 5:44 pm on January 9, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
After watching the 2 short youtube films, “I am Canadian” and “Canadian Please” it is obvious that the majority of Canadian population understands and represents truly what a Canadian stands for in his or her lifetime. For example, Canada’s identity has always been being the peacekeepers around the world and not wanting to get involved in wars. They love to play hockey and say “eh”. I believe the “I am Canadian” ad is very correct by Molson, and that is how many people see Canadians outside of Canada. Canada may not know it, but it is in fact being sold TO them. In order to build nationalism for the country we use these tactics of always being “polite” and images of beavers and lumberjacks to stay molded together. Canada is a great country to live in with health benefits and a great landscape. These films outlined how proud we should be to be Canadian and to live in such a wonderful country. The Canadians are buying this information as it is always revolving around us. For example, when Canadians travel ( or even Americans) they will put the Canadian Flag ( with a maple leaf; another symbol) on their backpacks in order to display their “background” creating a good image for them. 21st century identity is outlined by the videos representing what Canadians are and what we stand for.
Kaitlin 6:07 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Kyle, thank you for your response highlighting some of the more “lovable” aspects of Canadian identity, as well as for suggesting that such pleasant images are also being “sold” to Canadian citizens who may not be too concerned with what it means to live in Canada. To continue thinking critically about Canadian identity, try to think of some examples that might undermine sweeping statements about who Canadians are. For example, do ALL communities across Canada enjoy playing (or even watching!) hockey? What about our reputation as peacekeepers–what kinds of roles did Canada play in WWII? Korea? Afghanistan?
jpellegrino 6:11 pm on January 9, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
These videos tell us a lot about our Canadian identity. More importantly, each video relies heavily on stereotypical ideas to describe our country as a whole. Each of the videos uses these stereotypes in a different way. For example, the beer ad “I Am Canadian,” uses a satirical approach. In doing so, the ad points fun at the fact that people outside of Canada stereotype us Canadians, as lumberjacks and fur traders who live in igloos. The advertisement then labels Canadians with more stereotypes, while bringing in patriotic music. Because of the way in which this advertisement goes about selling their product, I believe that the beer is being sold to young, Canadian men. On the other hand, the next video uses a song as a way to shine light on Canadianism. Also pointing out stereotypes, this song is directed to both children and adults. Using the song and costume helps to engage those of younger ages; meanwhile, the lyrics have more meaning to older groups. After watching both of these videos, I think that each is tells us that Canadian identity of the twenty-first century is highly labeled and that our history has more to it than just beavers, RCMP’s and Hockey. While the video is able to attract those whom they intend to, using these Canadian, satirical stereotypes, they do not tell us any more than what most of us already know. In hindsight, the videos tell us that Canadian identity of this day and age needs to be further distinguished apart from universal stereotypes.
Kaitlin 6:35 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Nice work shedding light on the irony of the Molson ad replacing stereotypes of Canadians with… more stereotypes! I’m curious what exactly it is about the video that prompts you to speculate that the beer is being sold to young men, though. Do you think the things that Joe Canadian is referring to are somehow more “masculine” than “feminine”? By extension, is the Canadian identity that Joe/Molson promote embodied only by guys who look like Joe?!
lindswong 7:59 pm on January 9, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
These shorts portray a view of Canada that is stereotypical and defensive. Particularly in “Canadian Please,” the chorus defends Canadian icons in reference to other countries’ icons in order to protect our image as a country that is proud of our accomplishments. It enforces Canadian stereotypes in order to give us a distinct identity that has been carried and developed throughout the centuries. In the Molson Canadian commercial there is more a portrayal of what modern Canadians truly are, and particularly why we should be seen at least as important as our southerly neighbour. These shorts try to prove that Canada is more than just that “push-over” country living in the shadow and fear of the U.S. Canada in the 21st century has moved on from the past, such the fear of manifest destiny that was a driving factor in confederation. Instead it focuses on our achievements and accomplishments and our overall development into a united and strong country. Together these shorts are selling an image of being Canadian, not as that country who has icons like any other country, but as a country filled with people who embrace and are even proud of these stereotypes no matter how ridiculous they may seem sometimes. Whose buying this image? The world. These shorts are aimed at all those who aren’t Canadian and have yet to know why our stereotypes are different than everyone else’s stereotypes. We want the world to buy the belief that we stand together in unity as a country that is distinct as well as diverse and proud to be Canadian!
Kaitlin 6:50 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi there! You’re heading toward an interesting analysis of these shorts when you suggest that they are aimed at “all those who aren’t Canadian and have yet to know why our stereotypes are different” from others’. Can you speak a little bit about HOW and WHY you think that Canadian stereotypes are different? Or why you think it’s important that “the world” “buy” the idea that Canadians stand together in unity? Your language there ( about “buying” who Canadians are) is fascinating, as it sounds like national identity is something to be consumed–like a nice, cold beer for example!
Vinciane Boisson 1:45 am on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
These two videos repeat the same stereotypes that have been and are broadcast about Canadians and Canada. Like stereotypes about every countries, although they are partly based on truth, they are now outdated or largely exaggerated. However, it is the case for most (every?) nations, and I would argue that it helps defining a nation’s culture.
The two videos appear similar but the process with which they assert Canadian identity is different. In “I am Canadian,” the process is fairly common, as it consists in a list of usual Canadian stereotypes and a strong insistence on Canada being different from the United States.
I feel that “Canadian, Please” tries to assert Canadian identity in a more unusual way and without using common stereotypes. Instead, they appeal to facts that truly defines Canada, and make comparisons to other cultures to assert that Canada is just as much a country with its own culture as any other.
I have read on this forum that Canadians did not feel patriotic in general. My experience here as an exchange student proved me the exact contrary. From what I have heard so far, Canadians generally see their country in a very good light, are very proud of it and regularly re-assert some features of their being Canadian through stereotypes.
I think those videos are meant both to Canadians to feel a certain feeling of unity and, most of all, pride, as well as for the rest of the world, to recognize Canada as having its very own culture, if not a superior one.
Kaitlin 7:04 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Vinciane, thank you for drawing our attention to the fact that most, if not all, countries have similar “lists” of stereotypes about their citizenry, and that they CAN be useful in thinking about a nation–even if the stereotypes aren’t “true”! Thank you also for sharing your view on Canadian patriotism as an exchange student. Perhaps you are more attuned to it as a visitor to Canada? The Canadians you meet might want to help give you a great impression of their country and themselves; whereas when Canadians interact with other Canadians (who might just accept that Canada is great, etc.) they don’t feel the need to openly state how proud they are of Canada?
Have you had similar experiences travelling to other countries? Has anyone else on this forum found that they become increasingly patriotic of their own country when travelling to other ones or interacting with visitors?
chliane 2:30 am on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Stereotypes about the Canadian identity are presented in the videos, but stereotypes are present and common for any country. In the “Canadian, Please” video they mention some of those stereotypes from other countries, for instance ‘lose the gun,’ which is obviously referring to the gun happy Americans. But these stereotypes do not accurately reflect the identity of a citizen living in any country. My argument is that these videos have very little, if anything to do with a real Canadian’s identity. Instead of relating to the actual icon itself, we relate to the stereotype. Stereotypes such as Canadians exist in a perpetual winter and drink maple syrup, when in reality few of us have had these experiences, or the experiences may be highly localized in one region of Canada. These stereotypes are repeated and circulated to a point where they become a truth.
These ‘truths’ are further confirmed by the media. They sell us the Canadian experience with their Canadian products, and we buy both the product and the idea of Canadian identity. The advertisement where the beaver jumps on the obnoxious American makes us feel united against the others, who are mean and not as smart. What these videos tell us about the Canadian identity in the 21st century is that we are united and are proud of our country, and we identify each other though our own distinct icons. But those icons we recognize as part of our identity are sold to us through the media, and probably based on jokes that were made by Russell Peters.
Kaitlin 9:38 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Great response to the videos! I like how you worked to break down national stereotypes (i.e. living in perpetual winter) into more localized/regional experiences, referred to the powers of repetition and dissemination in creating “truths”, paid homage to the media’s work in selling iconography, AND worked in Russell Peters.
jenniferbishop 11:49 am on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The “Canadian, Please” and “I am Canadian” videos both address the Canadian identity through using stereotypes that people outside of Canada have. In the “I am Canadian” video, Jo says, “he is not a lumberjack, does live in a igloo, has a prime minister not a president, that a tunic is a hat, and that it is pronounced zed not zee”. This video continues on to mention how Canada is the best part of North America. As a whole the video gives its audience the sense that even though all of these stereotypes do exist, these are the things that make Canada, Canada and that we should be proud of these things that make us different. In the “Canadian, Please” is presenting the same Canadian identity has the “I am Canadian” video. It points the stereotypes of the RCMP, we are all polite, that no one owns guns, and multiculturalism. That is being sold in these videos is the idea of Canadian nationalism and all of the things bringing Canada together as a nation.
Kaitlin 9:47 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Jennifer, good work summarizing aspects of each video here. I’m wondering if you agree with one or both of them, and the pictures they paint about what Canada is and who Canadians are… Do you “buy” the idea that ALL Canadians are polite? Don’t own guns? Uphold multiculturalism? Love playing/watching hockey? If you had to imagine what a “typical” Canadian looked like, would it be “Joe Canadian” from the Molson ad? Who is being left out if so?
mwaldron 11:54 am on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The two videos, “Canadian, Please” and “I am Canadian” play on the well known stereotypes of the Canadian culture to bring about a sense of patriotism, and to separate Canada as it’s own entity in North America, especially from the United States of America. However, I’m not sure I agree on the way the producers of both videos went about in comparing Canada to other countries (although I am fully aware that satire is 100% involved). Not only do we automatically assume everyone wants to be a Canadian, we also reinforce the exact stereotypes that drive most Canadian nuts (e.g. living in igloos, we all own canoes, etc). As mentioned by chilane above, we are all fully aware that as Canadians, most of these things do not occur on the regular, and are reinforced by the media time and time again to the point of “truth.”
As for our Canadian identity in the 21st century, it seems as if in these two videos, we are presenting ourselves as a united front, with our own symbols, stereotypes and features unique to Canada. A feat which is sometimes forgotten about in Canadian culture; although we are all proud to be Canadians, we don’t always display our patriotism outwardly. However, it is interesting that many of these symbols that we claim to be “Canadian,” we don’t articulate HOW they really are national symbols. For example, maple syrup; A lot of people (even Canadians) believe it is a symbol because we put it on everything, and don’t make a connection between the symbol and events within our own country, such as the fact that Canadians were the first to tap the syrup. The same can be said for the beaver – it isn’t just on the nickel, it is a symbol of the past fur trade that our country was built on. It seems as if we may be losing touch with the real reasons behind our national symbols, even though we use them in national and international ad campaigns. We are selling our sense of nationalism and togetherness to our own Canadian audience, and to the larger international audience as well, and it seems we are all buying into it.
Kaitlin 9:53 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Marissa, you’ve done a great job building on chilane’s (I’m not sure if this is their real name and not just a username–apologies if it isn’t!) post about the sweeping assumptions that go into creating and upholding national stereotypes. Your comments about HOW symbols become “national” are especially intriguing, and suggest a deeper role for Canadian history in contemporary culture. Good work!
amandawoodland 11:55 am on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The two shorts “Canadian, Please” and “I am Canadian” are emphasizing a definition of what it means to be Canadian based on somewhat superficial ideas; however, I don’t think this is a bad thing at all. Although a nation’s history should be respected and valued as what has shaped that nation into what it is today, what truly defines a country lies in the here-and-now. For example, a common stereotype about Canadians is that we own pet beavers. This has little (or nothing) to do with the history of Canada. Rather, it is more of a modern-day joke that has caught on and become funny. Similar examples are the ideas that Canadians live in igloos, work as lumberjacks, and eat maple syrup on everything. These stereotypes, while silly and largely untrue, can actually be taken to suggest that Canadians take extreme pride in the characteristics of our country – the native animals, the weather, and the resources, etc. “I am Canadian” and “Canadian, Please” both play on these kinds of ideas in a lighthearted way, which also suggests that Canadians are proud to be who we are no matter what anyone thinks of us. Furthermore, the direct comparisons to other countries shows that we consider ourselves to be the best! Both shorts sell a strong sense of national pride that any Canadian can fit into, regardless of how much they know about Canadian history. By focussing on modern ideas, the shorts are easily accessible to young people.
Kaitlin 10:03 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Amanda, this is a nice lighthearted defense of the surface symbols presented in these videos! I’m intrigued by your claim that “what truly defines a country lies in the here-and-now”. All of the examples you give–pet beavers, igloos, lumberjacks, maple syrup–have very real historical roots SOMEWHERE, even though they’ve been significantly distorted and satirized over time! I also want to gently push you to think about one of your final statements: CAN “any Canadian fit into” these stereotypes? Or do the videos assume a particular audience…?
aviaah 1:08 pm on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
From watching both videos, it is obvious that Canadians pride themselves on being just that: Canadian. The level of patriotism and esteem oozing from both videos is sky-high, but it must be taken into consideration that much of this self-worth is drawn from stereotypical Canadian symbols that are widely recognized and identified by Canadians and the world alike in the 21st century. Tokens that pay homage to this “Canadian Identity” include many clichéd images, such as the beaver, mounties, hockey, and the renowned maple leaf. What’s being sold here is not merely just beer, nor is it simply a boastful display, but rather an insipid Canadian identity that rests upon broad stereotypes and an innate desire to be seen as a separate superior entity to that of the Americans. Being a Canadian, I understand that creating a separate and unique identity for Canada is key, as we are consistently looped in with the United States and considered to be a carbon-copy of American culture. In saying this though, I must contend that building an identity upon modern clichéd images and symbols that inspire nothing more than a short burst of Canadian pride impedes upon any chance we have to establish a true and distinctive Canadian identity, which should rightfully be build upon historical and cultural foundations. Rather than being known as über polite, maple syrup loving, moose riding hockey fanatics, we should establish ourselves as a vast coherent nation of cultural, historical, and environmental wealth. If we look to our North American counterparts to the South, we often associate them with “manifest destiny” and being a “military giant”. When the spotlight is on Canada, we are often associated with trivial symbols, which barely encompass a fraction of what Canada is all about. All in all, although both videos are amusing and somewhat uplifting, they lack, for me, the ongoing spirit and lustre that should accompany a tribute to Canada and Canadian identity as a whole.
Kaitlin 10:26 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Aviaah, this is an interesting take on the two videos–your response is clearly very passionate! While this post contains many examples of what you see as superficial images/symbols/stereotypes of Canadians, I’m wondering what icons or symbols you might choose to better represent Canada as a ” vast coherent nation of cultural, historical, and environmental wealth”? What do those words mean to you? What do you think Canada is “all about”?
amrita 1:43 pm on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The two videos speak highly of the pride of being a Canadian. In the twenty first century, these videos collectively demonstrate the different aspects of being Canadian. In the video done by two students dressed as RCMP officers we see the symbolism of justice and integrity present in the uniform. In other video of the Molson commercial, we see that the Canadian is polite enough to endure the mocking stereotypical insults from his fellow coworker, but when it becomes too much, he resorts to aggressive behaviour. I would actually say that this scene, though amusing, does not collectively represent the identity of Canadians. We Canadians are known to be polite and perhaps even to take a stand on issues that matter to us, but it does not mean we are violent in any way when provoked — though that’s what the commercial seems to imply. These two videos demonstrate that we have a rich history and have quite a bit of attributes associated with being Canadian, and collectively, they both depict the Canadian identity as that of one being filled with pride and happiness.
In terms of who these videos are targeted at and who is buying or selling the message or product in them, there is a very large difference. In the “Canadian, Please” video, it is targeted to non-citizens of Canada and telling them that we know they want to be Canadian because we and Canada itself is so amazing. The Molson commercial seems to be targeted at Canadians. I attest to this because at the very end of the commercial the announcer boldy claims he is Canadian, once again demonstrating our pride in Canada and in ourselves having the identity of being Canadian.
Kaitlin 10:40 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Amrita, you make some good points about the possible readings of these videos in your post. I’m really interested in your interpretation of Joe’s speech in the Molson ad–how he is polite until he is pushed to his edge (and gives his “aggressive” talk)–but that you don’t see his outburst and potential violence as representative of Canadians. To play Devil’s Advocate here, “mild-mannered” Canadians are also known to riot over hockey scores, take part in demonstrations/protests that can become violent, and historically played offensive roles in two world wars–not to mention other military conflicts!
oftheawkwards 3:39 pm on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Being an immigrant to canada, I still have not fully figure out canadian identity. Despite the Advertisements and Patriotic Videos i have seen over 12 years in canada, all I really figured out is that, we are stereotypical and culturally “neutral”. Our Multiculturalism aspect of society breaks down any collective Identity as a nation. I would say, despite everything mentioned in the first video, is that, we as canadians, are a group that can live with each other. World views gave us “what is means to be canadian” such as Hockey, Maple Syrup, Beaver, Saying “Sorry”, but they are not what really define canada. The first Video is more to give canadians pride through what is “awesome” about being canadian while the second video is to show people whom are not from canada what it is to be like.
canadian pride is not like what is seen in other countries, we do not hold any social or political beliefs as a collective nation, but our understanding of each other can be used to describe canadian identity
Kaitlin 10:48 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Harry: I was born and raised in Canada–and I still haven’t fully figured out Canadian identity either! Your idea of Canada being culturally “neutral” is very interesting; that multiculturalism “breaks down any collective identity as a nation” is also intriguing. I think you could find a number of examples of groups within Canada who would fit your model: Franco-Canadiens, Indigenous groups, etc. Do you think it’s possible that this multiplicity of identities comes together to make up an overarching Canadian identity?
ecopeland 5:44 pm on January 10, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The two videos utilise comedy to connect with the Canadian viewer and play on the stereotypes and the reality of what a Canadian really is. The “I am Canadian” advertisement links the good things about being a Canadian specifically with the Molson brand of beer, as if suggesting to the audience that you could not be one without the other. I get the feeling that this advert is directed at an older demographic than the “Canadian, Please” video. It’s use of largely more mature life events that makes one a Canadian would stir familiarity in an slightly older demographic. The “I am Canadian” campaign bases each archetypal action or event on what the company believes is important to the 21st Century Canadian viewer; family, friends, hockey and morals. Whilst the “Canadian, Please” advert relies on a literal song and dance being popular and catchy rather than connecting with the viewer or even providing any information about the beer itself. The campaign aims to make an attachment to the beer through the videos popularity and therefore similarly aims to inform their decision when next buying beer. The “Canadian, Please” advert is aimed at people who are already Canadians so it is clear that the advert is trying to say that everyone else wants to be Canadian, trying to bolster national pride the company seeks to tie Canadianism with its brand of beer, affirming just like the “I am Canadian” advertisement that to be Canadian you have to drink Canadian beer.
Kaitlin 11:03 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi there! Nice attention to the demographics of each videos’ intended audience. Your breakdown of the Molson ad into four 21st century “Canadian” values is insightful, as is your connection of “true” Canadian identity with the purchase and consumption of Canadian beer. Also: the short music video isn’t trying to sell us any brand of beer–just an identity!
Kaitlin 11:10 pm on January 11, 2014 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi there L1A!
Thanks to all those of you who have already responded to the videos–you’ve made some wonderful insights. We’re still waiting to hear from a few more of you & will still accept submissions for this assignment due to the potential mix-up of switching tutorials and blog walls for some of you. Looking forward to meeting you all in person this week!
-Kaitlin